Chris Lombardi puts defense and security under the spotlight, as he shares his takes on recent NATO and EU cooperation and provides insight into the company’s own long-term strategic partnerships in Europe.

Three trends are currently driving the global electricity sector: decarbonization, decentralization and differentiation. Utilities are making significant contributions to mitigate carbon emissions, while a technology revolution is …

Multilingualism is a job for everyone

The President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso has decided that there should be a European commissioner for multilingualism. He is proposing to assign the multilingualism portfolio to Leonard Orban, who is to be Romania’s first commissioner. Previously multilingualism was the third (and smallest) responsibility in the portfolio of Ján Figel’, the Slovak who has since 2004 been commissioner for education, culture and multilingualism. It was no secret at the time that he was assigned these duties that Figel’ did not believe he had been given enough to do, so no one should expect Orban to be over-occupied.

One interpretation of Barroso’s choice of portfolio for Orban is that he has simply chosen the path of least possible disruption. The decision to take responsibility for consumer protection away from Markos Kyprianou and give it to Meglena Kuneva, the new commissioner from Bulgaria, is similarly neat. He has avoided a more significant reshuffle and so ensured that he need not submit his college of commissioners to re-examination or a vote by the European Parliament.

If that is the case, then the assignment of multilingualism to Orban can be lightly dismissed: Barroso means little by it and Orban should expect a quiet life, with plenty of time for extra-mural activities, like language classes.

But it is just possible that Barroso intends that his Commission should attach greater importance to multilingualism. Figel’ issued a statement this week welcoming Orban’s assignment (and by implication the reduction in his own duties) and suggesting that “two years ago the decision by President Barroso to include multilingualism as part of a portfolio for the first time was a clear indication of the importance given to this issue by the new Commission”.

Barroso, Figel’ and Orban should tread warily. Languages are closely tied up with notions of identity – ethnic, national and regional. There is no common approach to the use of languages, nor should there be. Luxembourg has never insisted that Luxembourgish should be recognised as a language of the EU. Ireland used to take a similar approach about Irish but changed its stance in 2004, which is why Irish will also become an official language along with Romanian and Bulgarian on 1 January. The search for sufficient quantities of Maltese translators is something of a joke.

It is true that the multilingualism of the EU is one of its defining characteristics: the EU institutions are unlike other international institutions precisely because they embrace so many languages. Multilingualism is part of the EU’s confusing mix of national and supranational. But it does not follow that the European Commission should, by definition, be in favour of multilingualism in ever-increasing complexity. It does not follow that the arrangements that applied at the beginning of the EU, when the six founder countries shared four languages, French, German, Italian and Dutch, should apply in perpetuity in all aspects of EU life – not least because the permutations of language combinations climb exponentially as the number of official languages increases.

In certain aspects of the life of the EU institutions, particularly interaction with ordinary citizens, it is right to protect language rights. But in other aspects, such as the internal working of the institutions – multilingualism will have to be reduced.

It may be that what the EU needs is a commissioner who will, on occasion, confront multilingualism and question the extent to which it promotes good and efficient lawmaking. Indeed all commissioners should do so: multi-lingualism is not in itself an absolute good.

An Anglophone newspaper cannot expect to be taken seriously on this point: the dominance of English has increased markedly in Brussels since the EU’s May 2004 enlargement. Nevertheless, it is worth questioning whether putting multilingualism on a pedestal or assigning it its own commissioner makes sense.

Multilingualism is one of the underlying values of the union and as such should be cherished by all commissioners. But a commissioner for multilingualism is either a gimmick or a mistake.